Journal of Superhard Materials

ISSN: 1063-4576 (Print) 1934-9408 (Online)

Description

Journal of Superhard Materials  presents up-to-date results of basic and applied research on production, properties, and applications of superhard materials and related tools. It publishes the results of fundamental research on physicochemical processes of forming and growth of single-crystal, polycrystalline, and dispersed materials, diamond and diamond-like films; developments of methods for spontaneous and controlled synthesis of superhard materials and methods for static, explosive and epitaxial synthesis. The focus of the journal is large single crystals of synthetic diamonds; elite grinding powders and micron powders of synthetic diamonds and cubic boron nitride; polycrystalline and composite superhard materials based on diamond and cubic boron nitride; diamond and carbide tools for highly efficient metal-working, boring, stone-working, coal mining and geological exploration; articles of ceramic; polishing pastes for high-precision optics; precision lathes for diamond turning; technologies of precise machining of metals, glass, and ceramics. The journal covers all fundamental and technological aspects of synthesis, characterization, properties, devices and applications of these materials. The journal welcomes manuscripts from all countries in the English language.

PEER REVIEW

Journal of Superhard Materials is a peer reviewed journal. We use a single blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes 48 reviewers, both internal and external (60%), from 6 countries (France, Poland, Russian Federation, Sweden, Ukraine, USA). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 7 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 30 days. The rejection rate for submitted manuscripts in 2017 was 30%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.

Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified or unable to review the manuscript due to the conflict of interests should promptly notify the editors and decline the invitation. Reviewers should formulate their statements clearly in a sound and reasoned way so that authors can use reviewer’s arguments to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors must be avoided. Reviewers should indicate in a review (i) any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors, (ii) anything that has been reported in previous publications and not given appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Browse Volumes & Issues